Rich Paul sued by NBA player Nerlens Noel over lost $58 million
- Thread starter goatmane
- Start date
So basically as far as you know there are no receipts......
Goatpoacher
Superstar
If a Sixers executive says he tried contacting Rich Paul about signing Noel but never received a response, how is that not evidence?
Would team execs need to give a statement or testify to prove so in this instance?
Wonder if they’d participate…whether being urged by the NBA to be honest to avoid bigger issues down the line, or try to get Rich Paul out the paint.
I wonder if Trez would have a case similar to this
Three questions:
1. Does that exec have proof of said communications?
2. If not, what relationship does Noel have or has had with that exec?
3. What history/relationship does that exec have with Rich?
I believe it. He tried the same shyt with Morris Sr making him reneg on that Spurs deal just to sign for 5 mil with the knicks. Only thing was Morris was smart and dumped his ass ASAP. (Granted he also wasn’t limited like Noel but still) Paul is garbage and a leech. The minute Lebron bounces he will be blackballed status. And before any dikkhead LeGBT Stan comes with the dap fishing shyt, there are agents like Gaston who was mentioned earlier, Raymond Brothers, etc
The possibility of something being true and proving that thing actually true is not the same thing
Goatpoacher
Superstar
1. His words and recollection are proof
2. Why would this matter?
3. Why would this matter? Wouldn't a judge/jury only care about the customs and practices amongst execs and agents? If it is customary for an exec to contact an agent and customary for an agent to respond, then what else is necessary?
1. Recollection maybe evidence but it's far from proof. Recollections can be faulty or fabricated.
2. Motive
3. Motive
No..Money..Mo..Problems
it is what it is
I don't understand why dudes get greedy take the first big offer you get and work on your game. Steph was making 10 mill annually for like 4 years before he got the bag.
Goatpoacher
Superstar
Civil Lawsuit only requires preponderance of evidence. Besides, in this day and age, there are always records of communication.
And motive does not matter, what matters is whether or not Rich Paul fulfilled his duties as a fiduciary. The reason he may have failed to do so is irrelevant.
Then has said records been produced?
Has Noel supplied any communications from Rich that suggests that he acted in a way other than Noel's wishes?
In order for Rich to have failed his fiduciary responsibility, wouldn't he have had to either act contrary to Noel's wishes, or purposely withheld or supplied information that negatively affected Noel's decision making?
BTW my direct legal experience is mostly military criminal law, not civilian stuff.